Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Swarovski NL Pure 10x vs 12x

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 gmkirk130

gmkirk130

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2018

Posted 04 December 2020 - 06:17 PM

Hi all,

 

I’m debating getting a NL Pure 10x or 12x but I’d like to use whichever one I get for astronomy (some of the brighter Messier objects, etc.) as well as terrestrially. Could anyone talk to how the 12x has performed for astronomy?

 

I’m aware the exit pupil is lower on the 12x (impacting light-gathering ability) but I’ve also seen comments that the 12x is “pushing the optics” of the series and I’m not sure what that means. Any insights would be very appreciated, especially from those who have tried out both magnifications in daylight and under the night skies. 
 

Thanks in advance,

Gary



#2 Erik Bakker

Erik Bakker

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 9,130
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Netherlands, Europe

Posted 04 December 2020 - 06:47 PM

The 12x shows a bit more false color and less color saturation and contrast compared to the 10x NL.



#3 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 37,957
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 04 December 2020 - 07:31 PM

I've not been fortunate or privileged enough to try any one of these newly acclaimed "Kings of the hill" Swarovski NL Pure binoculars, but based upon what I've read and what I've experienced with lots of other binoculars, first of all I would disagree with the suggestion that "the smaller exit pupil of the 12x impacts light gathering".

 

On the matter of choice between the 10x and 12x models, my personal advise would be if in serious doubt when choosing between two otherwise "identical" binoculars in terms of build and optical quality -- go with the one with the lower magnification.

 

* It will be easier to hand - hold steadily

 

* It will have a wider true field of view

 

* It will probably have longer eye - relief

 

* It will provide "brighter" images

 

* It will be "more forgiving" of any aberrations

 

* It will easier to bring to perfect, sharp focus

 

* It will provide " a more relaxed" viewing experience

 

Kenny


  • edwincjones, Albie, hallelujah and 7 others like this

#4 DeanD

DeanD

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 339
  • Joined: 05 May 2018
  • Loc: South Australia

Posted 04 December 2020 - 08:15 PM

I would love to do a comparison: Swarovski: you can contact me via PM and send me a couple of "testers"!  wink.gif

 

I agree with Kenny: if I were getting one I would go for the 10x42. I think this will be more versatile for your stated usage. I would also get the forehead rest as an accessory.

 

And just for clarification: "light gathering" is accomplished by the objective lens. A 12x bino will have exactly the same "light gathering" capability as a 10x bino with the same size objective. However, this image will be slightly dimmer because of the slightly smaller exit pupil allowing a bit less light into the eye.

 

What a wonderful problem for you to have Gary! Not that I'm jealous of course...  wink.gif

 

- Dean


Edited by DeanD, 05 December 2020 - 12:00 AM.


#5 gmkirk130

gmkirk130

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2018

Posted 04 December 2020 - 08:30 PM

Thank you, all, for your input. I realize I was too imprecise when I used the term “light-gathering.” I should have stated that the lower exit pupil (of the 12x) will present less light to the eye. 
 

Regards,

Gary



#6 edwincjones

edwincjones

    Close Enough

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,576
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004

Posted 05 December 2020 - 05:35 AM

Gary,

 

I also, agree with KennyJ --in general; but  issues include

-what other optics do you have and how do the new binoculars compliment what you already have

-and maybe most important,  can you hold the 12x steady

 

my best suggestion is to go to a store that has both and compare side by side,

but these days rarely possible for most

 

from personal experience I have the leica duovid 10+15x50

I usually use the 10x, only go to 15x if I need more detail 

my favorite handheld pair is 8x56 for astronomy

 

edj


Edited by edwincjones, 05 December 2020 - 05:37 AM.

  • Erik Bakker and Mattimac like this

#7 ianatcn

ianatcn

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 572
  • Joined: 26 May 2010
  • Loc: Hampshire, UK

Posted 05 December 2020 - 12:01 PM

I have been using the 12x42 NL for several dark sky sessions now.  I have the forehead rest fitted.  I have had both SV 8.5x42 and 10x50 in the past, selling the 10x50 when I purchased the 12x42 NL.

 

I find the 12x42 as easy to hold steady as the 10x50, maybe even easier.  This is what struck me on the first observing session.  I find the view to be beyond reproach, to my eyes quite perfect.  I would say here that I have been using binoculars for astronomy nearly fifty years.  my eyes are definitely not as sensitive to ca as they were in my twenties! Having said that I have no trouble seeing ca in the older binoculars in my collection. Here I defer to Erik's younger eyes and his ability to see a difference in colour correction between 10x and 12x NL. The star images are perfect points over the entire field.  All of this is background to explain why I went with the 12x42.  It also fits in with my other most used binoculars filling a gap between the Nikon WX 10x50 and 15x56 SLC.

 

I have an older Zeiss Nobilem 12x50B Spezial  that I still use from time to time.  It is a big lump of porro and quite difficult to keep steady without some support.  I would think that if I had only experienced these 12x binoculars my advice would have been to go with the 10x.  This is one of those times where you really do need to try the 12x42 NL before dismissing them as too powerful to hand hold.


Edited by ianatcn, 05 December 2020 - 12:05 PM.

  • Erik Bakker, dries1 and ihf like this

#8 gmkirk130

gmkirk130

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2018

Posted 05 December 2020 - 01:19 PM

Thanks, again, for the input.  I plan to get the forehead rest, regardless of which magnification I purchase.  Unfortunately, trying the 10x and 12x side-by-side isn't an option for me.  

 

Regards,

Gary


  • ianatcn likes this

#9 ianatcn

ianatcn

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 572
  • Joined: 26 May 2010
  • Loc: Hampshire, UK

Posted 05 December 2020 - 03:42 PM

Thanks, again, for the input.  I plan to get the forehead rest, regardless of which magnification I purchase.  Unfortunately, trying the 10x and 12x side-by-side isn't an option for me.  

 

Regards,

Gary

Hi Gary,

 

I think you would be happy with either model.  If I did not already have the Nikon 10x50 I may well have gone with the 10x42 NL.  Like me, you may well find your choice governed by the other instruments you already have. 


  • Erik Bakker and gmkirk130 like this

#10 gmkirk130

gmkirk130

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2018

Posted 08 December 2020 - 10:58 AM

Hi Ian,
 

Could you speak to the brightness of the images you see at night with the NL compared to your other binoculars? I know the other two have larger apertures and exit pupils but your thoughts would be interesting. Thank you. 
 

Regards,

Gary


  • ianatcn likes this

#11 ianatcn

ianatcn

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 572
  • Joined: 26 May 2010
  • Loc: Hampshire, UK

Posted 08 December 2020 - 01:26 PM

Hi Ian,
 

Could you speak to the brightness of the images you see at night with the NL compared to your other binoculars? I know the other two have larger apertures and exit pupils but your thoughts would be interesting. Thank you. 
 

Regards,

Gary

Hi Gary, 

 

I have not done a definitive test for faintest stars between the binoculars.  I do remember the first outings with the 12x42 NL being very impressed with the contrast which is exceptional in the NL and to me the only other glass I have that gives a similar feel - very subjective this - is the Nikon WX.  Extended objects in the NL such as M31 and M33 look better to me in the 12x42 NL than in the 15x56 SLC. This is as much about the NL's expansive field of view providing a good margin of dark sky around the objects.  The satellite galaxies of M31 were easier to see in the 15x glass. I really like the 12x magnification coupled with the wide field and headrest which in combination make this a great astro glass. The 15x56 does go significantly deeper and shows M1 easily while it is an averted vision exercise in the 12x42.  M1 is one of those objects that rewards magnification and for this reason I prefer the view in a 20x60 or 40x80.

 

I wouldn't want to try and push you towards either the 10x or 12x.  Both are exceptional glasses.  I prefer the 12x42 to my previous SV 10x50.  It feels lighter in the hand, easier to hold steady and has wider angle eyepieces all of which factor in the experience it delivers. 


  • Erik Bakker, Grimnir and gmkirk130 like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics